Minutes: November 23, 2018

TLAB 19.1 Toronto Local Appeal Body – Chair's Update

TLAB 19.1                              INFORMATION                              RECEIVED

---

Toronto Local Appeal Body – Chair’s Update

 

Panel Decision

The Toronto Local Appeal Body received the update from the Toronto Local Appeal Body Chair, Ian Lord, as information.

 

Decision Advice and Other Information

The Toronto Local Appeal Body Chair provided updates on the following to the Panel Members:

New Panel Members

• A number of candidates have been identified to fill the 4 member vacancy.  The matter is on track for City Council’s consideration in December and implement in January.

Handling of Withdrawal matters

• The language is blunt in the statutory direction to inform the Secretary Treasurer when an appeal is withdrawn. The Toronto Local Appeal Body has put in place a process for withdrawals that requires the file to be vetted by a Panel Member with an ensuing order to acknowledge the withdrawal.  The order is then forwarded to the Secretary Treasurer as notification of the withdrawal and the TLAB case closes.
• A “clean” withdrawal can and should be a staff function. The Panel could have a Notice of Abandonment created to ensure that the tribunal has more than an email to go on.  Upon receipt of the Notice of Abandonment, staff could remit it right away to the Secretary Treasurer.
• Subject to having the implementation of the Notice of Abandonment, the process remains and Panel Members are still to review the withdrawal request and issue an order.

Uninvited Communications

• After a hearing concludes and before a decision is issued, complaints or other emails come in unsolicited, which are problematic.
• There was a situation where a correspondence had come to the Panel Member’s attention before a decision was issued which could have alter the decision’s outcome. The Panel Member should be completely isolated from all complaints and otherwise unsolicited communications until the decision is issued as it can be argued that receiving such unsolicited correspondences could bias a Panel Member’s decision.
• The tribunal must institute a process where these uninvited communications are quarantined from the Panel Member. The decision is to be considered, written, and issued, before the Panel Member is to be notified of any unsolicited communications.  The communications should not be posted on the case file.
• Panel Member S. Makuch:  There are circumstances wherein new information comes in that will substantially upend the decision making process; there should be consent from all parties before the correspondence is sent to the Panel Member.
• Duxbury Law:  In those circumstance, an effort should be made to convert uninvited communication to invited communication.  The party should contact the other parties and obtain consent to submit further correspondences after the conclusion of a hearing.
• Panel Member L. McPherson:  Not everything should be posted.
• Panel Member G. Burton:  Chair Lord’s memo is absolutely correct, the Panel Member should not see any comments and they shouldn’t be posted to ensure that the Panel Member doesn’t see them thereby protecting the process.
• Panel Member S. Makuch:  Should we post even after the hearing is done? I don’t think so.
• Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services:  The Toronto Local Appeal Body is a public body with a responsibility to maintain transparency.  All correspondences sent to the Toronto Local Appeal Body is considered to be a public record and attached to the case file.  Administrative staff do not vet submissions.  The process for unsolicited communication is to escalate the correspondence to the Chair if it is questionable in nature for consideration and direction.  On case specific correspondences received after the conclusion of a hearing but prior to the issuance of a decision, the process is to notify the Panel Member as to how to proceed with the communication without sending the member the actual correspondence.  All documents and correspondences submitted to the Toronto Local Appeal Body is a public record.  The fact that the document is public is separate from the fact that it is posted online to the case file.  Even if a document is not posted online, if there is an FOI request, they are entitled to the entirety of the case file.
• Chair, I. Lord:  If a Participant writes a glowing overview of the member, where should that go? It is a positive, but uninvited communication, so where does it go?
• Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services:  If it is a Panel Member conduct related correspondence, it is sent to the Chair of the Tribunal for review and response.  The communication is not posted.  If the correspondence is case related, staff notify the Panel Member of the correspondence but do not post it to the case file.  Staff requires formal direction from the Panel on how to proceed in these circumstances.

Facilities Update

• Parties have expressed discomfort with the rooms, there are assurances that deficiencies will be addressed.
• Panel Member S. Makuch:  When we are adjourning something, with consents and variances having to take two days. Sometimes there is not a room available.  Why can’t we just keep scheduling outside of the TLAB location to expedite? Is it a budgetary issue?
• Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services:  It is not a budgetary issue.  Facilities have asked that we hold off on our requests to book offsite rooms for 2019 until January.  Without being able to confirm rooms, we are hesitant to book external rooms.

 

Parking Access

• Panel Member D. Lombardi: We need to do something about the parking issue, as mentioned to staff multiple times, when going off-site. For the TLAB Panel Members and maybe even staff, we must address parking for close proximity to the building. Why can’t a TLAB Panel Member be allowed to park in a staff parking lot for even one day?
• Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services:  We are guests to those facilities.  We make the request for parking access in advance, however, we have no control over their protocols or what they can allow. We do our best to make arrangements well in advance, but beyond that, there is nothing that we can influence.
• Chair, I. Lord: Who is in charge, we should have authorization to demand of those facilities to allow parking. It will be an item in the annual report.

Summary

Toronto Local Appeal Body Chair, Ian Lord, to provide opening remarks and provide the Panel with an update on Tribunal business.

 

Motions

1. Motion to receive the Toronto Local Appeal Body Chair’s Update as information moved by Panel Member L. McPherson and seconded by Panel Member G. Burton.  (Carried)

 

TLAB 19.2 Toronto Local Appeal Body – Correspondences

TLAB 19.1                              INFORMATION                              RECEIVED

---

Toronto Local Appeal Body – Correspondences

 

Panel Decision

The Toronto Local Appeal Body received the correspondences submitted by OBA and FONTRA as information.

 

Decision Advice and Other Information

• Panel Member S. Makuch: Suggested evening hearing sessions as it could make a difference to citizens and their ability to attend, but what it does to staffing and costs remains to be seen.  It could be interesting and the Panel should be more open to it, especially when looking for adjournment dates where the people want to show up and they can’t. The tribunal would be able to truncate long delays.
• Chair I. Lord: The building can support it, but we must ask staff to see.
• Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services:  This is an issue that must be brought to senior management’s attention.  Confirmed that the hours of operations are Monday to Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
• Panel Member L. McPherson:  It would be worth it to explore the option.

• Panel Member D. Lombardi: Takes umbrage with some of the comments contained within the FONTRA letter and what they are suggesting, insofar as the site-visits are concerned.
• Panel Member G. Burton: Has taken media courses on how to respond to things, and always has said to not respond to letters like these.
• Panel Member D. Lombardi: Our mediation rule should be more advertised, because we have it, and people don’t really know about it.

Summary

The Toronto Local Appeal Body to receive correspondence from , stakeholders and/or professionals.

 

Supporting Documents

(November 2018)  OBA Submission to TLAB on Draft Rules of Practice and Procedure

(November 2018)  FONTRA TLAB Additional Feedback

 

Motions

1. Motion to receive the correspondences submitted by OBA and FONTRA as information moved by Panel Member S. Makuch and seconded by Panel Member L. McPherson.  (Carried)

TLAB 19.3 Toronto Local Appeal Body – Updates from Administrative Staff

TLAB 19.3                              INFORMATION                              RECEIVED

---

Toronto Local Appeal Body – Updates from Administrative Staff

 

Panel Decision

The Toronto Local Appeal Body received the administrative update provided by Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services, as information.

 

The Toronto Local Appeal Body approved implementation of a new motion process for written hearings.

 

Decision Advice and Other Information

• Assignment confirmations are now sent to Panel Members in batches by month.  Assignment confirmations are sent to Panel Member 3 months in advance.
• Implementation of the New Motions Process:
  • Motion assignments will be one motion, per member, per day
  • Pending approval from the Panel, effective November 26, 2018, administrative staff will no longer issue fixed motion dates for written motion requests.  Staff will provide a deadline for perfecting the Notice of Motion.  The deadline provided will be a date after the election due date.  Staff will also provide to the moving party the following submission deadlines that are to be included in the Notice of Motion; the Response submission deadline (7 calendar dates after the Notice of Motion submission deadline) and the Reply to Response deadline (11 calendar days after the Notice of Motion submission deadline).
• Forms have been revised to incorporate the changes discussed throughout the review of the Rules of Practice and Procedure process.  The most significant changes include the Notice of Public Record on each form and the removal of the signature field with the exception of Form 10, Affidavits.
• Scheduling Process:  At the Chair’s direction, administrative staff will be scheduling any consent files with minor variance files attached for an automatic 2 day hearing. Any variance files will be scheduled as a 1 day hearing.

Summary

Court Services administrative staff to provide an update to the Toronto Local Appeal Body on:

• Number of TLAB Appeals received to date
• Number of TLAB Hearings scheduled to date
• Average number of days to dispense of matter
• New Motion process

 

Supporting Documents

(November 23, 2018)  Administrative Update

 

Motions

1. Motion to implement new Motion Process for written hearings effective Monday, November 26, 2018 moved by Panel Member G. Burton and seconded by Panel Member L. McPherson.  (Carried)

2.  Motion to receive the administrative update as provided by Hsing Yi Chao, Supervisor, Court Services, as information moved by Panel Member L. McPherson and seconded by Panel Member G. Burton.  (Carried)

TLAB 19.4 Toronto Local Appeal Body – Procedural Bylaw Update

TLAB 19.4                               INFORMATION                             ADOPTED

---

TLAB 19.4 Toronto Local Appeal Body – Procedural Bylaw Update

 

Panel Decision

The Toronto Local Appeal Body adopted the Procedural Bylaw as revised and amended.

The Toronto Local Appeal Body directed Court Services to seek further direction on the allowance of the balloting process as revised and in the event that it is in contravention to the process as allowed by the City of Toronto Act, further revisions are to be presented to the Panel on December 5, 2018.

 

Decision Advice and Other Information

• Russ Brownell, Policy Planning and Project Advisor, Court Services, provided an overview of the revisions made to the Procedural Bylaw to the Toronto Local Appeal Body Panel.
• Revisions to the Procedural By Law included:
  • Added definition of “Vice Chair”
  • Election of Vice Chair to occur annually with a provision to call an election at the Panel’s discretion.
  • Balloting process for the election of the Vice Chair attached as an appendix. Discussion ensued from the Panel with input from Duxbury Law on the level of privacy allotted to a balloting and election process.
  • Panel directed a closed ballot process with the results of the election made public by the Chair accompanied by a Motion brought to the Panel.  The Panel further directed Court Services to seek further direction on the allowance of the process as revised and in the event that it is in contravention to the process as allowed by the City of Toronto Act, further revisions are to be presented to the Panel on December 5, 2018.

Summary

Russ Brownell, Policy Planning and Project Advisor, Court Services, to provide an update on the amendments to the Procedural Bylaw.

 

Motions

1.  Motion to receive the information presented by Russ Brownell, Policy Planning and Project Advisor, Court Services, as information moved by Panel Member G. Burton and seconded by Panel Member S. Makuch.  (Carried)

2. Motion to adopt the Procedural By Law as amended effective Friday, November 23, 2018 moved by Panel Member S. Makuch and seconded by Panel Member G. Burton.  (Carried)

 

Meeting Sessions & Attendance

Meeting Sessions

Session Date	Session Type	Start Time	End Time	Public or Closed Session
November 23 2018	Morning	9:35 am	11:26 am	Public
November 23 2018	Recess	11:26 am	11:40 am
November 23 2018	Morning	11:40 am	12:15 pm	Public
November 23 2018	Recess	12:15 pm	1:31 pm
November 23 2018	Morning	1:31 pm	1:57 pm	Public

 

Attendance

Members were present for some or all of the time period indicated.

Date and Time	Quorum	Panel Members
November 23 2018 9:35 am to 11:26 am (Public Session)	Present	Present: Ian Lord (Chair), Gillian Burton, Sabnavis Gopikrishna, Stanley Makuch, Laurie McPherson, Dino Lombardi Absent: Ted Yao
November 23, 2018 11:40 am to 12:15 pm (Public Session)	Present	Present: Ian Lord (Chair), Gillian Burton, Sabnavis Gopikrishna, Stanley Makuch, Laurie McPherson, Dino Lombardi Absent: Ted Yao
November 23 2018 1:31 pm to 1:57 pm (Public Session)	Present	Present: Ian Lord (Chair), Gillian Burton, Stanley Makuch, Laurie McPherson, Dino Lombardi Absent: Ted Yao, Sabnavis Gopikrishna

 

Staff Attendance

Russ Brownell
Policy Planning and Project Advisor
Court Services

Hsing Yi Chao
Secretary / Supervisor
Toronto Local Appeal Body, Court Services

Tyra Dorsey
Support Assistant B
Toronto Local Appeal Body, Court Services

Joshua Pesce
Support Assistant B
Toronto Local Appeal Body, Court Services